Northern Ireland Act 1998: Cost of Implementing Section 75

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many additional civil servants have been employed by which public authorities in Northern Ireland to implement Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.

Baroness Amos: Within the Northern Ireland Government system no additional civil servants have been recruited for work specifically on the implementation of Section 75. The requirements of Section 75 have been met from within existing staff resources.

Northern Ireland Act 1998: Cost of Implementing Section 75

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What has been the cost of implementing Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998; and how this compares with any estimate given during the passage of the Bill.

Baroness Amos: Implementation of Section 75 is an integral part of the work of the public authorities in Northern Ireland. The cost of this work cannot readily be distinguished and could be obtained only at disproportionate cost.

Iraq: International Criminal Court

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they have been notified by the International Criminal Court of attempts by any party to bring a case against the United Kingdom Government in respect of the war against Iraq or the occupation of Iraq by British troops.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) wrote to Her Majesty's Ambassador in The Hague on 15 December 2003 forwarding a complaint made by the Athens Bar Association concerning British military operations in Iraq. We have not been notified by the prosecutor of any other petitions received by the ICC.
	In accordance with the provisions of the Rome Statute (Article 15(2)) the prosecutor asked the Government to provide information on the allegations. The Government have provided a formal reply to the prosecutor which, inter alia, gives the Government's response to the allegations and sets out the UK national procedures for the investigations of such allegations. The Government believe this reply is a convincing refutation of the allegations.

Iraq: Civilian Deaths and Injuries

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean on 7 June (WA 1), whether they will publish the statistics to which they have access of Iraqi civilian deaths and injuries.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: There are no reliable figures for Iraqi civilian deaths since March 2003. The Iraqi Ministry of Health has informed us that the number of civilians killed in security incidents is 1,203 and 3,992 wounded dating from when statistics began on 5 April 2004. However they reflect only hospital admissions and may not be comprehensive. It is not possible to break these down into how they were killed or who may have been responsible. It includes casualties caused by terrorist action.

Gaza: Demolition of Houses

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will inquire of the Government of Israel why they are proposing to demolish the houses in settlements, prior to withdrawing from the Gaza Strip, taking account of the shortage of housing for Palestinians.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: We would warmly welcome a withdrawal of settlers and the Israeli defence forces from Gaza. We are pleased that Israel is working on plans to do this. It will be key that withdrawal delivers real improvements for the lives of Palestinians. The Israeli Government are beginning planning on the practical details, including what becomes of settlement infrastructure. I hope that my forthcoming visit to Israel will be an opportunity to discuss practical issues of this kind with the Israeli Government.

Gibraltar: Tourist Boats

Lord Kilclooney: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What restrictions the Spanish Government have applied to tourist boats which visit Gibraltar; what representations they have made to Spain; and whether such restrictions are consistent with Spain's obligations as a member of the European Union.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: In April and May, a number of cruise ships were denied entry to Spanish ports, or told that they would be denied entry, if they called at Gibraltar first. My right honourable friend the Foreign Secretary told the Spanish Foreign Minister, Senor Moratinos, on 20 May that we regarded Spanish interference as unacceptable and illegal. Since 21 May, there have been no incidents that have come to the Government's attention. The Foreign Secretary has written to Senor Moratinos to underline the need to avoid any repetition of these actions. We continue to seek a permanent solution to this issue, and have asked the Commission to look into these incidents.

Asylum Seekers

The Earl of Sandwich: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What they have done to publicise the safe return of refugees and asylum seekers to their own countries and communities, so as to counteract any public perception that all asylum seekers and migrants are coming one way.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Government recognise that there is scope for us to promote our voluntary and enforced removals activity more than we are doing currently and we are taking various steps to try to achieve this. Given the sensitive nature of removals, we need to exercise caution and consider the safety and well-being of the individuals being removed. However, we are already taking steps to promote some enforced removals by putting some information into the public domain. This includes:
	Providing the media with updates on cases where they have previously displayed an interest;
	Providing general information in the form of press notices on removals to countries where removal has previously been problematic, for example, Afghanistan;
	Providing general information about removals initiatives such as charter flights and where appropriate allowing the media to film these events;
	Inviting members of the press to accompany officers on enforcement operations; and
	Publishing quarterly statistics on all areas of IND activity, including removals. These statistics can be found on the Home Office website.

European Arrest Warrant

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many applications have been made since the passing of the Extradition Act 2003 for the extradition of persons from the United Kingdom to those countries which are operating the European arrest warrant; and how many of those applications were in respect of British citizens.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Since the Extradition Act came into force on 1 January 2004, there have been 307 applications made to the UK under the European arrest warrant (EAW). Of these 307, 11 are in relation to British nationals.

European Arrest Warrant

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many applications have been made since the passing of the Extradition Act 2003 for the extradition of persons to the United Kingdom from those countries which are operating the European arrest warrant; and what were the nationalities of the persons who were the subjects of those applications.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Since 1 January 2004, the UK has issued 27 European arrest warrants under Part 3 of the Extradition Act 2003. Arising from these, six arrests have been effected which included British, Portuguese and Irish nationals.

European Arrest Warrant

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the European arrest warrant is operative between the A8 countries (the Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) and the United Kingdom.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Of the accession states who joined the European Union on 1 May 2004, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and Slovenia have transposed the European arrest warrant into their respective domestic legislation.
	We are currently in the process of designating these states as extradition partners under Part 1 of the Extradition Act 2003. The remaining states expect to implement the European arrest warrant in the near future.

Deportation: Prisoners

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many prisoners due for deportation were held in HM prisons after the expiry of their sentences, at the most recent date.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Information on the number of people who were detained in prison establishments awaiting deportation after completion of a criminal sentence is not available.
	Work is ongoing to improve the quality of data held on those people detained under Immigration Act powers in Prison Service establishments.

Deportation: Prisoners

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What measures they are taking to improve co-operation between the Immigration and Nationality Directorate and the Prison Service.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Prison Service and the Immigration and Nationality Directorate are committed to improving the way they share information about immigration status of foreign national prisoners.
	The two services are working closely together on the arrangements for the early removal scheme and have met monthly since December 2003 as part of this work. This will continue.
	Improvements are being made to the systems for exchanging information and consideration is currently being given to the development of IT links between the two organisations. There are also plans to set up a joint Prison Service/Immigration Service liaison group as a forum to tackle and solve operational problems.

People Trafficking

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will discuss with the International Organisation for Migration the resettlement in third countries of people trafficked for exploitation who cannot be repatriated and for whom there is no local employment, with particular reference to the United Kingdom, Bosnia and Kosovo.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The identification, registration and overall management of resettlement cases worldwide is conducted by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). All caseloads for the UK resettlement programme are selected in consultation with the UNHCR, based on its resettlement needs handbook. The International Organisation for Migration is responsible for certain aspects of the resettlement operation, such as transportation, but has no direct involvement in the process of referring applications to the United Kingdom. Plans have already been made for filling this year's quota for the UK resettlement programme.

Mountain Rescue Teams

Lord Jopling: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will make a grant to the mountain rescue teams of England and Wales, in view of the recent grant made by the Scottish Parliament to the Scottish rescue teams.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The recent grant made to the Scottish mountain rescue teams went to the police forces in Scotland to cover costs incurred by teams affiliated to the Mountain Rescue Committee of Scotland. In England and Wales the police funding formula, by which police grant is allocated, reflects the relative needs of all police authorities. There is no component of the funding formula directly related to mountainous geography of any police force area. The funding formula is established and maintained in consultation with the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Association of Police Authorities (APA) and any significant issues are taken into account when the funding formula is reviewed. My right honourable friend the Home Secretary is always prepared to consider requests for a special grant payment when a police authority is faced with a particularly extraordinary funding pressure on a specific issue.

Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000: Section 2

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many additional civil servants have been employed to implement Section 2 of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000; and by which of the specified authorities listed in Schedule 1A to the Act they were employed; and
	What has been the cost of implementing Section 2 of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000; and how this compares with any estimate given during the passage of the Bill.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: More than 43,000 public bodies are listed in Schedule 1A to the 2000 Act. There is no centrally held information on who is employed by these public bodies to implement Section 2 of the Act or the cost to them.

Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000: Section 2

Lord Laird: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What evidence they have of the benefits which have resulted from the implementation of Section 2 of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The full benefits of the duty to promote race equality will be realised over time, as it becomes mainstreamed in the work of public bodies.
	Research conducted on behalf of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE) found that nearly 70 per cent of public authorities and educational institutions felt that their work on implementing the duty had already produced positive results. The benefit most commonly cited was increased awareness of race equality in policy making and service delivery; other benefits included increased ability to ensure policies and services were targeted and designed appropriately.
	Supporting evidence to the findings of the research conducted on behalf of the CRE has been published in the Audit Commission's report, The journey to race equality published in January 2004. This states that the duty to promote race equality and good race relations under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act is the most influential driver of activity on race equality.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate collects ethnic monitoring information about the research teams to whom it awards contracts.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS) does not collect ethnic monitoring information on the external organisations awarded research contracts. It does comply with Schedule 1A to the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, although the duties under this schedule cannot be passed to third parties.
	We have also conducted a review of the RDS business plan in 2002 with an external academic peer group to review how the planning processes and scope address equality issues.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Home Office meets its obligations under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, which covers contracts with suppliers.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Home Office recognises that integrating race equality into the procurement process can improve the quality of Home Office services, making them more appropriate and more responsive to the needs of different communities.
	Procurement guidance has been issued explaining how to take account of race equality and ethnic minority issues in public procurement. To comply with the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 and its duty to promote race equality, the department's procurement policies and practices promote equality of opportunity and good race relations. These policies and practices are regularly reviewed to check that they are in compliance with the aims of the Act.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate is taking to develop and support a diverse group of researchers who can be invited to submit research tenders, and what is being done to provide support for potential bidders in complying with procurement requirements.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate (RDS) conducts a wide range of research and analysis in support of Home Office delivery including work undertaken through external contracts. The RDS website allows interested parties the opportunity to submit an expression of interest in research areas. This information is then entered into an RDS database and used when considering who to send an invitation to tender. RDS is implementing a further initiative to place more details of research programmes on the website.
	To develop and support a diverse group of researchers, RDS requests expressions of interest on a project basis; actively identifies potential new contractors through searches of university websites; is represented at significant public seminars and conferences and organises meetings itself to see the work of researchers outside the confines of the client-contractor context. The external peer review programme enables a wide group of researchers to be aware of RDS work. In addition, RDS staff membership of professional societies and networks enables RDS work to be visible to a wider group of potential contractors.
	The Home Office provides support for potential bidders by ensuring that invitations to tender contain full details of instructions as to how to tender and the information required, as well as the Home Office standard terms and conditions of contract. A suppliers' guide is available on the Home Office website. The guide acts as a signpost for potential bidders and helps to identify opportunities, explaining how to bid for work and providing contact points for all the Home Office procurement units.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether it is the policy of the Home Office to ensure that procurement requirements are assessed for their impact under the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The Home Office is committed to mainstreaming race equality into its policies and services. The Home Office race equality scheme "requires members of the core Home Office to assess and consult wherever practicable, on the potential impact of policies on different communities".
	This includes procurement requirements and is reflected in the associate race equality schemes. The scheme requires the Home Office to consider, for example, "whether contracts should be used to specify actions that contractors should take to ensure the Home Office does not fail to meet its obligations".
	The Home Office race equality scheme is under review. The reference to procurement processes will be maintained in the new scheme.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate will publish a list of those organisations that have been awarded Home Office research contracts over the past three years.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The available information on the organisations awarded research contracts with the Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate over the past three years will be placed in the Library.

Home Office: Research Contracts

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many researchers working for the Home Office Research, Development and Statistics Directorate who received contracts had previously been Home Office employees in the 24 months before the contract was awarded.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: The available records show that Home Office Research Development and Statistics Directorate has given research contracts to two individuals who had previously been employed by the Home Office within 24 months of their departure.

Strip Searches: Under-18s

Lord Dholakia: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many strip search procedures have been used on children and young people under 18 in the secure estate in the past five years; and how many required the use of physical restraint; and
	How many times illicit drugs or weapons have been found in the past five years during strip searches on children and young people under 18.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: In England and Wales, there are no arrangements at present specifically for recording strip searches centrally. However, there are plans to introduce such monitoring within an improved electronic prisoner information management system. This project will initially undergo a pilot exercise, which is due to be completed in June 2005.
	Information on the number of illicit drugs or weapons cannot be provided except at disproportionate cost. At present there are no central records of finds of weapons from strip searching and the central records of finds of drugs and drug user equipment do not provide separate data on juveniles.
	The Northern Ireland Prison Service does not have a centralised database of search statistics and no separate search records are held for those under 18. Physical restraints to achieve searching are not used in Northern Ireland. Finds arising from searches are logged but again there is no central database. Drug finds are reported to the service's drugs adviser but these are not broken down by age. To obtain this information would be at disproportionate cost.
	You should approach the Scottish Executive about Scottish prisons as this is a devolved matter.

Immigration Detention Centres: Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many cases involving children held in immigration detention centres for more than 28 days have been reviewed by the Minister responsible since 16 December 2003; and with what results.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Management information indicates that on 27 March 2004, 30 children were in detention who were detained solely under Immigration Act powers. Twenty-five (83 per cent) of those had been in detention for 14 days or less and the remainder had been detained for less than six months. These individuals were all detained as part of families whose detention as a group was considered necessary.
	Records show that all children held in detention under immigration law for a period greater than 28 days since 16 December 2003 have been subject to ministerial authorisation. Outcomes of the cases detained for a period greater than 28 days vary according to the circumstances of individual cases.
	Detention of families with children is used sparingly, usually to effect removal, and only where this is judged to be necessary on the basis of the individual circumstances of the case. Close scrutiny of cases involving families with children ensures that removal is effected as early as possible or, where this is not feasible, that the family is released from the removal centre.

Immigration Detention Centres: Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Since 16 December 2003 how many families with children held at Dungavel Immigration Centre have received a welfare assessment on being held for 21 days; what were the results; and who conducted the reviews; and
	Why welfare assessments of the needs of families with children held in immigration detention centres other than Dungavel are not carried out after 21 days.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: A system of welfare assessment at day 21 of a child's detention has not yet been introduced. We are continuing to explore the possibility of establishing protocols with local social services to facilitate these assessments. This work is being carried forward initially at Dungavel and, if successful, we would plan to extend it to other removal centres that may hold families with children.

Immigration Detention Centres: Children

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why three families with children were held in immigration detention centres for respectively 143, 165 and 129 days prior to removal or release between November 2003 and May 2004.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Information on individual cases is confidential and cannot be divulged without the expressed consent of the individuals concerned. This is due to the Home Office's legal obligation under common law, human rights and data protection legislation, and the treatment of private and personal information under the Code of Practice on Access to Government Information (paragraph 2 of Part II).
	Government policy on the use of detention is that it may normally be appropriate:
	to effect removal;
	initially to establish a person's identity or basis of claim; or
	where there is reason to believe that the person will fail to comply with any conditions attached to the grant of temporary admission or release.
	In addition, asylum applicants may be detained as part of the fast-track asylum process if it appears that their applications are straightforward and capable of being decided quickly.
	As with any case, there is a presumption in favour of granting temporary admission or temporary release to families with children wherever possible. There will be occasions when temporary release is not considered appropriate. In these cases detention is necessary in the interests of maintained effective immigration control.
	Cases involving families with children in detention are dealt with as expeditiously as possible to ensure that the period of detention is kept to a minimum. Cases of families with children detained for more than 28 days are subject to ministerial authorisation. Such cases are small in number and by their nature tend to be exceptional.
	Unfortunately in some cases, the detention of families with children is prolonged as removal is deliberately disrupted by resistive behaviour by some family members or through deliberately belated legal challenges.

Immigration Service

Baroness Anelay of St Johns: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they have taken to implement the overhaul of the Immigration Service as announced by the Prime Minister earlier this year; and which non-governmental organisations will be consulted on the proposals for change.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: To support the top-to-bottom review of the immigration system called for by my right honourable friend the Prime Minister, my right honourable friend the Home Secretary set up managed migration taskforces.
	The taskforces work across the whole of Immigration and Nationality Directorate (IND) and with other departments and stakeholders to identify and address any areas of abuse of managed migration routes, drawing on intelligence, the experience of front-line staff and management information from across the system. In this way, the department is building on what worked to reduce abuse of the asylum system in a comprehensive monitoring and reporting framework. This will allow resources to be properly directed to target potential abuse even before problems arise.
	Based on the work to date, we have already announced a number of steps to tackle abuses of the marriage, students and employment routes. These include:
	To date the student taskforce has visited 401 colleges about which we had suspicions and applications to those institutions clearly found to be bogus are now being refused. A registration scheme is being established for genuine colleges and will be operational by the turn of the year. Once this has been done, student visas will not be issued in respect of colleges not on the register.
	To tackle the increasing problem of sham marriages being used to circumvent immigration controls, the Government are bringing forward legislation to establish powers to restrict the authorisation of marriages involving foreign nationals from outside the European Economic Area (EEA) to designated register offices and to introduce a pre-marriage eligibility requirement for such cases.
	Based on the analysis and recommendations of the employment and business taskforce, the sectors-based scheme quota has been cut for the year beginning 1 June 2004. The scheme has been reduced from a total of 20,000 to 6,000 in food processing and 9,000 in hospitality. The Government have also announced that the seasonal agricultural workers scheme quota will be reduced in 2005 by 35 per cent. These cuts reflect the proportion of the previous year's quotas taken up by workers from the accession countries, who are now entitled to come and work in the UK under the worker registration scheme. The taskforce is currently consulting on introducing country-specific quotas which will be dependent on countries having satisfactory returns agreements with the UK.
	We are consulting with non-governmental organisations (NGOs) at the NGO quarterly meetings, which discuss developments in European and international asylum policy. This group is made up of representatives from bodies including UNHCR, the Refugee Council, the Scottish Refugee Council, Amnesty International, Oxfam and Refugee Action. Ministers also have regular meetings with the chief executive of the Refugee Council and UNHCR to discuss issues of concern relating to immigration and asylum.
	Further, the marriage taskforce has formed a cross-governmental joint working group made up of officials from the offices of the registrars general for England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, the Department for Constitutional Affairs, the Church of England, LACORS, and registrars from across the UK. The group is working on identifying strengths and weaknesses of current systems and will facilitate the introduction of the aforementioned designated centres.
	The student taskforce has held key meetings with stakeholders in the education sector, including Lord Tomlinson's group of blue chip private colleges. Workshops have been organised with the sector to discuss how best to implement arrangements for notifying us of overseas students who fail to turn up for, or drop out of, a course, as well as for strengthening the fees requirement for applications.

Yarl's Wood

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress has been made in implementing the recommendations made by the Prisons Ombudsman in his investigation into allegations of racism, abuse and violence at the Yarl's Wood immigration removal centre; when they expect to have completed the process; and what plans they have for applying the recommendation to the immigration detention estate.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Following the Prison Ombudsman investigation report into the allegations of racism, abuse and violence at Yarl's Wood, the Immigration Service produced an action plan for Yarl's Wood and the rest of the detention estate. From the total of the 30 recommendations made, 12 have been implemented, nine will be implemented by the end of June 2004 and the remaining nine are on target to be implemented by the end of September 2004.

Lindholme Detention Centre

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will end the use of Lindholme, near Doncaster, as a detention and removal centre until such time as it has been fully refurbished.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: We have no plans at present to stop using Lindholme as an immigration removal centre. However, we are naturally concerned at the findings of Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Prisons following her recent inspection of the centre. The recommendations made by the chief inspector will be considered very carefully and, where necessary, changes and improvements will be made in the management and operation of the centre. Discussions with the Prison Service about the day-to-day operation of the centre are taking place as a matter of priority. Problems about the cleanliness of the centre have been addressed since the time of the inspection by the letting of a new cleaning contract and concerns about the state of repair of parts of the buildings will be addressed as part of the refurbishment programme for the centre.

Iraq: Interrogation Techniques

Lord Lamont of Lerwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they approve of the use of sleep deprivation, disorientation techniques and other non-violent ways of putting pressure on prisoners in Iraq; whether they have communicated their views to the United States government; and whether they are satisfied that such techniques are not supported by the United States authorities with respect to certain prisoners in Iraq.

Lord Bach: All United Kingdom interrogators must successfully complete a stringent course prior to undertaking any operational interrogations. During the course they are specifically instructed that individuals being questioned must be treated at all times in accordance with the Geneva Conventions. Techniques such as sleep deprivation are forms of coercion that are banned by the conventions.
	The United States is a signatory of the Geneva Conventions and the US administration have made clear that those responsible for mistreating Iraqis will be brought to justice.

Iraq: Prisoners Captured by British Forces

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 8 July 2003 (WA 31–32) concerning the arrangement for the transfer of prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees that was declassified on 11 November 2003, how many prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees have been transferred from the United Kingdom as the detaining power to the United States as the accepting power; and how many in each of those categories are still held by the United States as the accepting power; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 8 July 2003 (WA 31–32) concerning the arrangement for the transfer of prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees that was declassifed on 11 November 2003, how the United Kingdom has enforced the responsibility of the United States as the accepting power for maintaining and safeguarding all such individuals; and how many visits have been made to such prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees, using Her Majesty's Government's full right of access; and
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 30 April (WA 106–107), whether they now believe all persons captured by United Kingdom forces in Iraq and transferred to United States control have been treated humanely and decently; and what inquiries they have made and actions they have taken to ensure they have been so treated.

Lord Bach: The UK transferred about 340 prisoners of war to the US in April 2003. All but two have subsequently been released. We are satisfied that both remaining prisoners are being treated humanely in accordance with the Geneva Conventions, to which the US is a signatory.
	Between May and December 2003—when the UK divisional temporary detention facility was opened—almost all of those interned by UK forces for security reasons were held at the US facility in Umm Qasr. There was a continuous UK presence at the camp and we are not aware of any reports of deliberate mistreatment of UK internees there or elsewhere. The majority were released prior to December and the remaining few were transferred back into UK custody when the UK DTDF was opened.
	Since December 2003 those UK internees transferred to the US have been held at the US facility of Abu Ghraib. All but four have been released. Two of those will be released shortly and we are continuing to have regular discussions with the US regarding the final two. We are not aware of any reports of deliberate mistreatment of UK internees.
	The US do not hold any UK detainees.

Iraq: Prisoners Captured by British Forces

Lord Oakeshott of Seagrove Bay: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 8 July 2003 (WA 31–32) concerning the arrangement for the transfer of prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees that was declassified on 11 November 2003, how many prisoners of war, civilian internees and civilian detainees transferred to the United States as the accepting power have been repatriated or removed to territories outside Iraq; and why.

Lord Bach: None.

MoD and Environmental Tectonics Corporation

Lord Tebbit: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Bach on 26 May (WA 147), whether any compensation has been paid to Environmental Tectonics Corporation by the Ministry of Defence in respect of the ending of that company's contract.

Lord Bach: I can confirm that under the terms of the mediated settlement on the Royal Air Force Centrifuge the Ministry of Defence has made a compensation payment to the Environmental Tectonics Corporation.

Iraq: Depleted Uranium

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the environmental field survey will analyse and monitor water courses for depleted uranium in Iraq.

Lord Bach: In light of the local security situation, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has still been unable to begin its environmental field survey of Iraq. Therefore UNEP's planned monitoring of depleted uranium in the environment, including water, has not yet started.

Skipton Fund

Lord Morris of Manchester: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What consideration they have given to the representations about the Skipton Fund sent to the Department of Health by the Lord Morris of Manchester on behalf of the Haemophilia Society in Scotland; and whether they will be taking any action.

Lord Warner: The Haemophilia Society in Scotland's representations about the Skipton Fund were received by the Department of Health on 14 June. Ministers and officials are considering these comments, and a comprehensive response will be provided. A copy of the reply will be placed in the Library.

Chronic Skin Diseases

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is their definition of the term "chronic disease"; and
	Whether eczema and psoriasis are classified as "chronic diseases"; and
	Whether money has been allocated to fund chronic disease management clinics for inflammatory skin diseases; and
	Whether any money will be allocated to fund chronic disease management clinics for inflammatory skin diseases.

Lord Warner: Chronic diseases are those that can only be controlled and not, at present, cured. In some circumstances, eczema and psoriasis will be regarded as chronic. It will depend on how severely the patient is affected.
	Primary care trusts, in partnership with local stakeholders, have the responsibility for deciding what services to provide for their populations, including those with skin disease. They are best placed to understand local health needs and commission services to meet them.
	Decisions on whether to fund chronic disease management clinics for inflammatory skin diseases will therefore be made locally.

Chronic Skin Diseases

Baroness Masham of Ilton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why skin diseases were not included in the Department of Health's recent document Improving Chronic Disease Management.

Lord Warner: The document Improving Chronic Disease Management is intended to highlight the need to improve the management and treatment of chronic conditions, whatever they are. References to specific conditions are purely for illustrative purposes.

Copper

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What research has been carried out on the effects of a high dietary intake of copper on human health.

Lord Warner: The safety of dietary copper was considered by the Expert Group on Vitamins and Minerals (EVM) in 2003. It was noted that the evidence on the long-term effects of high levels of copper intake in humans is limited. However, the EVM concluded that the existing evidence indicates no adverse effects of high dietary intakes (7.5–10mg/day) of copper. A copy of the EVM report is available in the Library.

Copper

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Why the level of copper permitted for use as a fungicide on organic crops is decreasing year-on-year; and what evidence there is of toxicity in copper-related crops to support this policy.

Lord Whitty: The decreasing level of application of copper based pesticides has been set in the EU Organic Farming Regulation because the Commission and a number of member states are concerned that the regular use of copper fungicides leads to an accumulation of copper that can eventually effect soil biology and crops.
	This is a long-term issue (it does not affect the current crop) which is one reason why it was agreed to be acceptable to have a programme of gradually reducing applications. This is intended to give the industry time to find alternatives. The effects of long-term copper use are widely documented in the scientific literature for example the following publication:
	Secondary and Micronutrients for Vegetables and Field Crops
	Extension Bulletin E-486, Revised August 1994
	By M. L. Vitosh, D. D. Warncke and R. E. Lucas
	Department of Crop and Soil Sciences
	Michigan State University
	Problems occur principally on fixed crops such as vines that receive repeated treatments over time. In organic production in the UK, copper-based fungicides are used mainly on potatoes.
	Newcastle University is leading a European-wide project to seek an alternative to copper.

Hazardous Waste

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What research is available to inform their decision on whether hazardous wastes may safely be burned in incinerators.

Lord Whitty: The burning of hazardous wastes is currently controlled by the Hazardous Waste Incineration Regulations 1998 (SI 1998 No 767) which will be superseded by the Waste Incineration (England and Wales) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002 No 2980) and associated directions from 28 December 2005 although the latter already apply to any incinerators new or substantially changed since 28 December 2002.
	These regulations transpose the respective requirements of European Directives 94/67/EC on the incineration of hazardous waste and 2000/76/EC on the incineration of waste (under the latter, the former will be repealed from 28 December 2005). These contain emission limits for a range of pollutants associated with incineration which were agreed in the negotiations leading to the adoption of those directives. The limits in the latter are more stringent and reflect further research into the health effects of the pollutants.

Hazardous Waste

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the definition of an incinerator in which hazardous waste may be burned; whether there are different classes of incinerator; and whether the same regulatory regime applies to each class.

Lord Whitty: The definition of an incineration plant provided in the Waste Incineration (England and Wales) Regulations 2002 (SI 2002 No 2980) is "incineration plant means any stationary or mobile technical unit and equipment dedicated to the thermal treatment of wastes with or without recovery of the combustion heat generated. This includes the incineration by oxidation of waste as well as other thermal treatment processes such as pyrolysis, gasification or plasma processes in so far as the substances resulting from the treatment are subsequently incinerated".
	Different designs of incinerators are available for incinerating solid and liquid hazardous wastes. However, the same regulatory regime applies irrespective of the type of design of the incinerator. Hazardous waste incinerators existing prior to 28 December 2002 are currently subject to the Hazardous Waste Incineration Directive (implemented into legislation by the Hazardous Waste Incineration Regulations 1998 (SI 1998 No 767) but will be subject to the more stringent controls of SI 2002 No 2980 from 28 December 2005 which already apply to any incinerators new since 28 December 2002.

Hazardous Waste

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether industrial processors, such as cement manufacturers, have to apply for a change of use permission and submit an environmental impact assessment if they choose to burn hazardous wastes.

Lord Whitty: The exact position will depend on the particular circumstances of individual cases. In general a change of fuel is not likely to result in a material change of use that will require planning permission and which would then require consideration of whether an environmental impact assessment was necessary.
	However, depending upon the circumstances of the case a change in fuel could require an application to the Environment Agency for a variation in the conditions of the integrated pollution control authorisation or pollution prevention and control permit relevant to the process.

Hazardous Waste

Baroness Miller of Chilthorne Domer: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	By what criteria the decision is made on whether waste, particularly hazardous waste, may be reclassified as fuel; and by whom such a decision is made.

Lord Whitty: The definition of waste in force in the United Kingdom is the definition in Article 1(a) of the Waste Framework Directive (as amended). It provides that waste means "any substance or object . . . which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard." Whether or not a substance is discarded as waste is a matter which must be determined on the facts of the case and the interpretation of the law is a matter for the courts. The European Court of Justice (ECJ) has issued several judgments on the interpretation of the definition of waste and the meaning of "discard". It rests in the first place with the producer of a substance to decide whether it is being discarded as waste. The Environment Agency is designated as a "competent authority" for the implementation of the directive in England and Wales and is responsible for the application of its controls to substances discarded as waste.
	The ECJ held in cases s C–418/97 and C–419/97 (ARCO Chemie Nederland Ltd) that, "The fact that that use as fuel is a common method of recovering waste and the fact that that substance is commonly regarded as waste may be taken as evidence that the holder has discarded that substance or intends or is required to discard it within the meaning of Article 1(a) of [the Waste Framework Directive]. However, whether it is in fact waste within the meaning of the directive must be determined in the light of all the circumstances, regard being had to the aim of the directive and the need to ensure that its effectiveness is not undermined."

Organic Crops: Pesticide Residues

Lord Rotherwick: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What tests are conducted to investigate the toxicity of pesticide residues in organic crops.

Lord Whitty: Pesticides used on organic produce are subject to the same requirements as other pesticides, to demonstrate acceptability of consumer intakes and operator, re-entry worker and bystander exposures. This will normally require a range of toxicity studies, from single exposures to lifetime exposures and investigations of mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, reproductive toxicity and teratogenicity. All are included in the EC review of pesticide active substances.